Results
of focus group and plan of action for Mountain View Elementary School's After
School Program
University
of Utah
Mia
Chard, Jenny Cheng, Charlie Gates, Ian Schiffman
On February 19, 2015, our Macro
group (Mia Chard, Jenny Cheng, Charlie Gates, Ian Shiffman) met with students
involved in the after school program at Mountain View Elementary in Salt Lake
City, Utah. We had come prepared with questions to conduct a focus group with
the first grade students currently attending the after school program. In
earlier work with the after school coordinator, Hadleigh Craig, the issue that
had been identified as most problematic was the poor attendance that the after
school program was currently experiencing. In an article entitled, Academic
Effects of After School Programs by Lee Shumaw (2001) he states,
"Researchers have determined that where children go after school, what
they do after school, and how their activities affect them depend on
characteristics of the children, families, communities, and programs
(p.2)." Agreeing with the above stated assessment and knowing the
importance of first hand information, we decided to go directly to the students
involved in the program to discuss the pros and cons of the current program and
what they believe could bring improvement and as a result increase attendance.
In conducting a focus group with the
students we followed the outline of good characteristics for a focus group
found in the article, "Social Analysis: Selected Tools and
Techniques" by Kruehar et al (2001) which states, "A good focus group
has the following characteristics: carefully recruited participants,
interacting in a comfortable environment, led by a skillful moderator, followed
by systematic analysis and reporting." Our carefully selected participants
were those students currently involved in the program, and of the age group
whose participation is lacking the most. We met with six out of the eight most
consistent first grade attendees; five were female, one was male. Of the six,
five of the students come five days a week and one of the students comes only
four days per week. The comfortable environment was in their school in one of
the many learning alcoves. Mia Chard and Jenny Cheng were the group members
selected as moderators and they prepared by evaluating the questions and
discussing how each would be asked and by whom. Charlie Gates and Ian Shiffman
were the data collectors of the information that was being gathered through the
questioning. We believed this to be the most effective way to conduct the
interview so that the moderators attention could solely be focused on the
students and keeping their relationship to the students intact and engaging as
the questions were asked. The systematic analysis and reporting will now be
discussed.
Of the eight questions asked to the
students, four focused on the after school program itself: why they come, their
likes, their dislikes, what they would want to change. Of these questions, one
trend that can be noted is the focus on academics. To the first question,
"Why do you come to the afterschool program?" the answers were
varied, however, most were of an educational nature. Two of the six students
stated they came to do homework, one specifically mentioned math, and one was
quoted as saying, "I like to learn new stuff." It's interesting to
note that while most stated that they came to the program for help with their schoolwork,
the dislike for doing the schoolwork was high. On the question asking about
dislikes, three out of the six students stated their greatest dislike being,
"Homework." When asked what they wish they could change, three out of
the six again stated homework, with one student animatedly stating, "No
more homework!"
Conversely, when asked what they liked
most about the program six out of the six students stated,
"Computers." In questioning what exactly they do on the computers,
the students shared that they played educational games. This led our group to
conclude that it isn't learning that the students struggle engaging in but
possibly the way in which the structured learning of "homework" is
addressed.
The other questions asked prompted more
wide-ranging answers that don't have many patterns to identify. All students
identified that other languages besides English were spoken at home but didn't
believe this to be a problem. In questioning what exactly their parent's know
about the program two out of the six stated they tell them what they do, one
states the parents, "know from backpack papers," and the other three
informed us that they don't tell their parents but they believe their parents
see what they do and "just know." Given this information, one pattern
identified is that the students understanding of what their parents know about
the program is based on assumption. Also, the last question about what they do
after school when they don't come to the program, identified various results
but none of an academic nature, with many stating video games or TV as
activities.
Gathering this information has led us
to believe that the after school program is of value to these students, but
that changes could be made to better accommodate the wants of the students to
match their needs of learning, development of social skills, and a productive
and helpful place for them to spend their after school hours.
Though computer time was reported to be
a popular activity at the afterschool program, there is a growing body of
research that suggests play can increase attention and academic achievement
(University of Illinois at Urbana, 2009).
Building on this, we wanted to find a way to balance the needs and
interests of the kids in getting help with homework, but also having a fun,
supportive environment in doing so.
Our group looked into different ways of
meeting these two needs, being mindful of what would be reasonable for staff to
incorporate into the current programming, that would not require a lot more
planning (since we know from previous conversations about agency dynamics, that
prep time is limited, and staff turnover is high). From our literature review, our group found
the Playworks program to be a good fit in addressing all of the needs of our
community.
Playworks creates structured, safe,
inclusive environments for students to build social skills, leadership competencies
and expend energy. The variety of activities makes it ideal to use in between
activities or for as long or as short as needed to support the learning
environment. A research brief published in 2011 reviewed a study of eight
schools in the Bay Area of California that implemented Playworks, and found the
program could “support an improved school climate” (John W. Gardner Center for
Youth and Their Communities, 2011) in which children could learn more
effectively.
In the state of Utah, Salt Lake School
District, Canyons School District, and Granite School District are all using
Playworks to some capacity within their schools (Playworks.org, 2015). Because
Mountain View is part of the Salt Lake City School District, it is our hope we
may be able to tap into this preexisting resource in implementing Playworks in
the afterschool program.
Currently the program goes directly
from snack time to homework time each day, so we plan to work with staff to
conduct brief Playworks activities in transition to homework time, and from
homework time to allow time for kids to get in the important activity of play,
and to increase focus and enjoyment of homework time. Our goal in this plan is to meet the goals of
the students and staff in a time and cost efficient way that can be sustainable
after our Macro group finishes the semester project.
As we were researching social change
models that might help meet the needs of the children involved in the after
school program we sought direction from Keri Taddie of the Community Learning
Center. She pointed us to a model
developed by the Search Institute called the 40 Developmental Assets for
Children Grades K-3 (ages 5-9). They
identified building blocks of healthy development for children which can be
useful to review when formulating or modifying an after-school program. The assets are categorized as either Internal
or External and are further grouped into broad categories of Support, Empowerment,
Boundaries & Expectations, Constructive Use of Time, Commitment to Learning,
Positive Values, Social Competencies, and Positive Identity (Search Institute,
2015).
We found that many of these assets are
being taught to the children in various capacities but that there were some
clear areas where work could probably be done.
Focusing on the Commitment to Learning section of the assets it lists
Achievement Motivation, Learning Engagement, Homework, Bonding to School and
Reading for Pleasure. The children we
met with all knew they were expected to complete homework and seemed to have
developed a bond to their school through their time in the after-school program
but their levels of achievement motivation and learning engagement likely have
room for improvement.
Continuing to work towards solutions
that are implementable for this program, we thought back to what we had learned
from our focus group. Although the children
tended to dislike and resist the learning assignments they identified as
homework, they expressed interest in learning activities on the computer that
were couched in the form of games. Our next steps will be to present findings
to the after-school coordinator in order to gauge her interest and ability to
work towards implementing possible changes to the curriculum with the intent of
increasing engagement of the children.
Our hope is that this will serve the need she identified to us of
maintaining attendance which would, ideally, aid in increasing attendance and
participation in the future.
We recognize that the coordinator may
have certain constraints on the level to which she can alter the program but we
expect a certain amount of change to be necessary to meet the goals she is
striving for. As Weisman and Gottfredson
(2001) assert “…creativity in program planning…” tends to be necessary in
retaining students.
The way in which we will be able to
gauge how well this project has assisted the target population is in whether
attendance has grown. This is simple enough to gauge: all that we would need to
do is look at whether more children were signed up for the program and are
attending regularly. Even a small change could be considered a success, for 87%
of the population of the school are ethnic minorities, and in similar schools,
even a small increase in attendance could mean considerable amounts of academic
success for those children (retrieved
from http://mountainview.slcschools.org/pages/communityed/, Yokley-Busby, 2014,
p. 1).
We are excited to see this program
flourish. We social workers have a unique position to ensure that children of
parents who have immigrated to our country are able to fully grasp onto the
services readily available to them (Greenberg, 2014, pp. 243-251). We hope to
see this change within the next few months before the school year ends.
REFERENCES
Greenberg,
J. P. (2014). Significance of after-school programming for immigrant children
during
middle childhood: Opportunities for school social work. Social Work, 59(3), 243-251. doi:10.1093/sw/swu022
http://mountainview.slcschools.org/pages/communityed/
John W.
Gardner Center for Youth and Their Communities. (2011). Playworks: Supporting
positive school environments in low-income elementary schools. (January, 2011).
Retrieved March 4, 2015 from http://www.playworks.org/sites/default/files/Playworks_School_Climate_Brief_FINAL.pdf
Krueger, R.A., Casey, M.A., Donner,
J., Kirsch, S., Maack, J.N. (2001). Social Analysis: Selected Tools and
Techniques. Retrieved March 2, 2015 from http://web.worldbank.org/archive/website01028/WEB/IMAGES/SDP_36.PDF#page=10
Playworks
Utah Community Website. Retrieved on March 4, 2015 from playworks.org/communities/utah/schools
Search
Institute. (2009). 40 Developmental Assets for Children Grades K-3 (ages 5-9).
Retrieved on March 10, 2015 from
ok.gov/sde/sites/ok.gov.sde/files/Prev-40AssetsK-3.pdf
Shumow,
L. (2000). Academic Effects of After-School Programs. Eric Digests, ED458010,
1-7.
University of
Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. (2009, April 1). Physical Activity May Strengthen
Children's Ability To Pay Attention. ScienceDaily. Retrieved March 4,
2015 from www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/03/090331183800.htm
Weisman, S. A., &
Gottfredson, D. C. (2001). Attrition from after school programs:
Characteristics of students who drop out. Prevention
Science, 2(3), 201-205.
Yokley-Busby,
S. (2014). The impact of attendance longevity in an after school program,
designed
to build intentional relationships and support academic success, on urban
elementary students' achievement, attendance, and school awards. Dissertation Abstracts International Section
A, 75,(2-A)
